From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Boxuan Zhai <bxzhai2010(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: MERGE command for inheritance |
Date: | 2010-08-11 15:23:27 |
Message-ID: | 1281540207.2142.1713.camel@ebony |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 11:03 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 13:25 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> I concur that Boxuan's suggested "difficult" approach seems like the
> >> right one.
>
> > Right, but you've completely ignored my proposal: lets do this in two
> > pieces. Get what we have now ready to commit, then add support for
> > partitioning later, as a second project.
>
> Do we really think this is anywhere near committable now?
>
> If it's committable in every other respect, I could see just having it
> throw a NOT_IMPLEMENTED error when the target table has children.
> I thought we were still a very long way from that though.
Well, if we go off chasing this particular goose then we will set
ourselves back at least one commitfest. I'd rather work towards having a
fully committable patch without inheritance sooner than an even bigger
patch arriving later in the cycle, which could make things difficult for
us.
I cite recent big patch experience as admissible evidence, m'lord.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-08-11 15:29:10 | Re: "micro bucket sort" ... |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-08-11 15:23:19 | Re: MERGE Specification |